Laskos wrote: ↑
Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:19 pm
Can you admit bluntly that Leela on an RTX GPU is objectively MUCH stronger positionally than any of these Stockfishes, Komodos etc even on 64 core machine (doesn't matter how many cores)? And that STS fails miserably in showing that, while it claimed to measure exactly that?
You don't want to understand that your definition of "positional strength", which I hope for you is more than the result of your "test suite", isn't mine, which of course isn't simply to me any single one other test suite neither, not any single one , not even like any single one like the to me still even better test suite like STS.
It wasn't me demanding from you a test suite that would replace eng-eng-games as for showing any certain kind of playing strength or of even overall playing strength (even more difficult to define because demanding even more single positions to be tested) but the one reflected by the single test you run.
Every test, by game-playing and by test suites depend on positions, opening, middle- game and end-game positions.
Game- playing from early opening positions only always test the opening positions and the strength in opening of the engines compared to each other three times more then endgame positions and three times more divided by two then middlegame- postions, because opeing positions are tested in opening, in middle- game and in end-game by the progress of game.
So if you want to give better measurements, you have to have better and more test postions, opening- ,middle-, and endgame positions.
By gameplaying from certain opening positions you test engines' ability to deal with these opening positions, by gameplaying from middlegame positions you test engines' abilities to deal with these middlegame positions and the same with endgame positions.
If you think, your positional test suite represents your definition of positional strenght best, fine, so be it for you and your definition.
What you must not expect, is that it would be anybody else's definition and test suite of one and only choice too.
If I find the positional qualities tested by STS better fitting to my definition of positional strength, you'll have to be confident with this as well or call me whatever you want.
But remember it wasn't and isn't me who claimed any single test suite a measurement for anybody else's definition of positional strength then the one given by the author of the suite as a very well defined one definition of its own, not more and not less.